The Site that Asks: Is the dictator justifying intervention by killing innocents? Or is someone else doing it for him? (previously The Libyan Civil War: Critical Views)

Warning

Warning: This site contains images and graphic descriptions of extreme violence and/or its effects. It's not as bad as it could be, but is meant to be shocking. Readers should be 18+ or a mature 17 or so. There is also some foul language occasionally, and potential for general upsetting of comforting conventional wisdom. Please view with discretion.

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Criminalizing Gaddafi Support

January 17, 2012
last updates May 3

First, a few scattered articles and limited commentary. Below, more pointed updates as the 2012 elections draw near. I invite further examples and developments in what I expect to be lively comments beneath. It's a potentially broad subject, how one ruling party and its supporters are made criminal to varying degrees and severed from civil society in favor of some other politico-economic vision.

This is a critique of the rules just laid down for the upcoming elections. Now that "democracy" has come to Libya, the people finally get to chose their leaders. As usual, the field to choose from will be narrowed by many, often invisible, factors. The largest and most important is set up now - no Gaddafi loyalists or anyone connected with the hyper-demonized old system or representing any of its ideals will be allowed. No matter how many people might want it, and perhaps because many will want it, the new leaders so indebted to the West will not allow it. Freedom isn't free and it's also got limits.

Those not allowed to hold public office, as Morrow writes:

Virtually everyone who worked at any level of Moammar Gaddafi’s former government is barred, unless they can demonstrate “early and clear support for the February 17th revolution.”

This is insane. "Early and clear support for the February 17th revolution" as a requirement for former government people means only those ideologically inclined to side with the conspiratorial likes of Ibrahim Dabbashi and Nouri al Mesmari,in the foreign-sponsored, traitorous, deceptive operation to sell the country out, are fit to run the government now. This is a very, very bad sign. It's not enough to just dominate and manage things, they demand a full purge and cleansin of anything decent (if demonized by relentless propaganda tricks) remaining in Libya's leadership ranks.

Those with an academic degree in Gaddafi’s “Third Universal Theory” or Green Book—previously required by many people to advance their careers—are ineligible.

Other statutes reportedly disqualify people who allegedly benefited monetarily from the regime or received diplomas or university degrees “without merit.” Massaoud El Kanuni, a Libyan lawyer specialising in constitutional law, told the Wall Street Journal: “That criteria could be used against three-quarters of the country. How are we going to follow a path of national reconciliation if so many people are excluded from [the country’s] future?”

Imagine scholars of the U.S. constitution barred from serving in liberated United States. Anyone who ever got government financial aid. Maybe anyone who received food assistance. Where exactly is the cut-off line here?

There should be little surprise; threats of political exclusion and even punishment go back. As Rebels encircled Sirte in September, cutting off fuel, food, water, and medicine while pummeling the city with indiscriminate rocket attacks coupled with extra-wide-ranging NATO air attacks. All inhabitants, many or perhaps most of them dedicated Gaddafi loyalists, were told to leave, and that only after surrendering at trigger-happy (and racist) Rebel checkpoints many never passed in freedom or alive. As the Wall Street Journal noted (second-hand source):

“As refugees gathered, the Misrata fighters checked their names against lists of suspected Gaddafi loyalists. Some men were arrested while others were told to wait on the side of the road with their families.

“‘We’re going to punish even those that supported Moammar with words,’ said a bearded fighter to a man who protested his detention. ‘We are the knights that liberated Libya.’ ”

TRIPOLI, Libya — Former rebels, weapons drawn, burst into the houses of suspected supporters of Moammar Gadhafi, searching rooms and hauling away military uniforms, a portable safe and documents that appear to link residents to the deposed regime.

The search party leader, a mosque preacher-turned-military chief, insisted only those who fought for Gadhafi — and not his political backers — will be interrogated and possibly punished.
[...]
Leaders of the rebels have said they seek reconciliation with most Gadhafi supporters, eager to avoid the mistakes made in post-war Iraq, where a purge prompted former regime loyalists to take up arms and helped destabilize the country for years.

The actions documented in the article, of this Imam and his local militia in Khalet al-Ferjan go somewhat against that (the mosque, its fighters, and possible connections to the Khamis Brigade shed massacre will be covered separately). Here, they're followed as they search several homes, angering a tax collector but finding only a green flag (taken, one presumes), carting off a safe, some cars, a bag of dog food. One man who protested was told to appear for questioning.

In the third house, which belonged to a family originally from Sirte, Gadhafi’s hometown, the search team found several piles of military uniforms, a Kalashnikov and a briefcase with documents, including photocopies of ID cards that suggested some in the family had fought for Gadhafi.

Furjani crouched and sorted through the papers, returning personal documents to a member of the family, Abdel Wahab Mohammed, while handing possibly incriminating ones to his aide, Mohammed Shiriana.

Mohammed insisted he was a civilian, but Shiriana, a construction engineer and aide to Furjani, said the documents indicate the man was a member of a Gadhafi brigade. Furjani said the man would also have to report for questioning.

How the searches go when they're not putting on a good show for the media is a troubling unknown. One man of the family was present and swore he was a civilian, but the papers said otherwise. He was in trouble. He'd been incriminated.

What was the alleged crime? A serious one - supoporting, being connected to, working for, fighting for ... the national government of his nation. When did the law making that a crime take effect, who signed it, and on what authority? Having a government job - even in the military - is not a crime, even if that government had been declared illegitimate by protesters, terrorists, rebel fighters, liars and demonizers, human rights groups, the media, the likes of Mesmari and Dabbashi, then France, Qatar, and then much of the world and NATO's collective air muscle.

All they did was support the government, like any patriotic citizen, and had the government lose. Losing the war is not a criminal act. I suppose that's a philosophical argument with no real legal merit - history has the winners writing the history books, just after re-writing the laws like a fortress around their intervention and victory. But still, having green flags in your home or car is not a crime. Not a capitol crime at least, as this video still suggests it was treated as (video filmed Abu Salim, Tripoli, app. Aug. 25). Fighting an invasion of your city by armed gangs supported by outside governments is not a crime, but the mainstream media acts as if it is.

In the mainstream narrative, the problem is only "innocent" people being too easily accused of being loyalists, or even fighters. When the charge is accurate, we seem to have little concern. Consider how Mrs. Afaf Gaddafi's family was killed, including two infants, as they tried to flee the city in September, for fear of being killed over their coincidental name. It was explained they'd been "mistaken for Gaddafi loyalists," possibly in part because of the name. The people with the bad reasoning and perhaps unsettling body language may have been the same ones with the guns responsible at the roadblock responsible.

They were wrong. Had they been right, well, that gets murkier. Revolutions can be messy. Freedom isn't free, and we know who can keep footing the bill for this one.

What's that? Some chemicals found, a theory that Gaddafi was planning to use poison gas? Mostly against children, especially pious ones? Ten, nay twenty more years in the brig for all green-clinging servants of the dark lord... maybe some should start dying mysteriously... maybe some heads on spikes around town would do nicely (claimed as rebular Libyans, blamed on Gaddafi sleeper cells)...
---Update Jan. 23

As elections in June draw near and the beliefs and grievances of Libya's people are to be aired and represented, Human Rights Watch called for curtailment of restrictive rules on who could run. April 28:

Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) should amend regulations to eliminate vague and broad prohibitions on who may serve as a government official or become a candidate for election, Human Rights Watch said today. [...] The current regulations prohibit people from holding senior government posts or running for office if they were “known for glorifying” the previous government or they “stood against the February 17 revolution” that overthrew Gaddafi. [...] Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch [said] "exclusion from public office should be based on concrete and provable claims of wrongdoing, rather than poorly defined connections with the previous government.”

A fair enough point, but that's not how the NTC roll. They're up against a highly popular system overthrown by a coup/uprising and artificially-enable civil war. If this is put up for election and the Green/Jamahiriya system re-instated by the peoples' will... well, that can't be aloowed to happen, even in part. No hints of the true weather can come through.
And so, a new NTC proclamation of May 2 clears up these problems. IOL News reports:

Libya's ruling National Transitional Council on Wednesday criminalised the glorification of slain leader Muammar Gaddafi and his regime. “Praising or glorifying Muammar Gaddafi, his regime, his ideas or his sons... is punishable by a prison sentence,” said the text of the law read out to reporters by a judicial official following a high-level meeting. “If those news reports, rumours or propaganda cause any damage to the state the penalty will be life in prison,” the official quoted the text as saying. “In conditions of war, there is a prison sentence for any person who spreads information and rumours which disrupt military preparations for the defence of the country, spread terror or weaken the citizens' morale,” he added. According to the law, Libya is still in a state of war following the 2011 bloody conflict that pitted Gaddafi loyalists against NATO-backed rebel forces.

Hold on - back when this started and started to finish it wasn't even war. In February, "Please note (to media): Libya is NOT at civil war, this is a state and regime attacking a whole population." In late October "Libya was not a civil war. The dictator didn’t have deep enough support to turn it into one. It was a revolution, a people against a regime, rising up without any instigation from us, with nothing but rage, humiliation and hope to guide them. We gave them air cover and they made a revolution." The people wouldn't be illegalizing and arresting and torturing each other in the thousands for past affiliations and loyalties if that liar were telling the truth. It wasn't a war, he says, past tense. Six months later, "the people of Libya" (NTC) say, it still is and will be for who knows how long. Even after the brutal deceit-soaked bloodbath of sacking of Tripoli, even after lynching Gaddafi and half his sons and officers, torturing some to death, all based on rumors and political-religious hate - still the war is on.
Why? Because the ideology and ideals of the Jamahiriya still remain in the hearts and minds of Libya'speople. Now their beliefs are the battlefield. How do you define "harm to the state," when your lifelong liberty is at stake? Better stay totally quiet just to be safe. No hint of nostalgia, of complaint, of any return from the total new future NATO brought you. In times of war, due process is optional. The war will continue for decades until the old ideals and those who harbor them are stifled away in locked boxes or put in the ground.

Any questions? Now get out and vote. This is free Libya after all.
Further ideas for the NTC as they shape the field for the elections: people shouldn't read sites like this, MATHABA, Libya S.O.S. Viewing can be tracked, arrests can be made. Sites can be blocked. State-run safety-filtered media only? No need, CNN and the others are on your side until you stray from the corporatist path. The first lesson f modern democracy is sculpting the public mind to vote for what you want them to vote for. You guys don't have time, so yes, you need to illegalize the alternatives. Probably harshly.

11 comments:

Interesting, government by "black box". Seems like the NTC health minister might have to renounce her citizenship of the Emerald Isle to be sure to be sure, as reported by the South African Mail & Guardian, 4 January 2012.

The NTC (If Jabril doesn't continue with his resignation (his Brmm-brmm got whacked) AFAIK will only allow Libyans with sole Libyan nationality to control Libya. This is confusing since the bloke in charge comes from UK and has been there for decades?This bolluxes up all the young tweeters that have never lived in Libya and conspired throughout this episode via the Social N/W by media-controlled impulse, now on their way to, 'Nirvana?'There appears to be no way the original 'Green' millions of Libyans can participate as they have been castigated from doing so.It also seems that many Libyans welcoming this takeover are now wondering why.Mothers now have to find $$ for housing, schooling, medical expenses, water, and have no Gadaffi doshed-out monthly gratuity so-long been assumed.Young males appear to have no work and are beginning to reflect on their situation.$$ appear to be non-existent or going, 'somewhere else?'Libya has achieved 'Democracy' in that they can now be 'Intellectually Free,' but the latter cannot be eaten?The 'Greens' appear to be objecting to this, 'Freedom,' and armed conflicts ensue.Unfortunately, Libyan Democracy appears intolerant of the Greens and doesn't include them in the 'New Order.'Mystifying, as they allegedly composed a significant objection to this debacle in the first place.Oh, the oil is increasingly flowing and every man and his dog is coming to Libya, to, "Help?"

guys i got some news on Libya the Greensor loyalists seem to be going on the attack. Fighters loyal to Muammar Gaddafi have seized back the town of Bani Walid and raised the late dictator's green flag, in a blow to Libya's struggling provisional government.

Reports said at least four people were killed during clashes between besieged forces loyal to the ruling National Transitional Council (NTC) and armed and well-organised supporters of Gaddafi. "They control the town now. They are roaming the town," one militia member was quoted as saying of the pro-Gaddafi fighters, according to Reuters.

Bani Walid, a former regime stronghold 110 miles south-east of Tripoli, was one of the last to succumb to pro-government forces after the capital fell in August. The latest clashes mark the most significant loyalist attack since Libya was officially "liberated" on 23 October. It appears further evidence of the NTC's weakness, incapacity and internal divisions ahead of supposed national elections later this year.

About 30 pro-government were reported to have been injured in exchanges of fire. Mahmud Warfelli, spokesman of Bani Walid local council, said 100-150 men armed with heavy weapons launched a carefully planned attack, swiftly overwhelming the town. Soldiers from the May 28 Brigade were pinned down in a compound and the attackers took up sniper positions in a mosque and a school, preventing the pro-government fighters from helping their wounded to safety.

As good a spot as any for this, for now. I've heard this whole time reports from Green sources of controlling Bani Walid, Benghazi, Tripoli, etc., vicious battles, jailbreaks, asassinations, etc... I can't follow, verify, et., have left that to the experts. But AFAIK this is the first time a mainstream news outlet, I noticed al Arabiya first, acknowledging loyalist/Government of Libya control over a supposedly liberated city. Now Russia Today and the Guardian. I'll have to have a closer look now, thanks.

I hope they're able to bring some cold-shower reality back to the situation, as opposed to just more bloodshed.

i hpoe so just as you do but the situation may get worse Press Tv just made a report saying the U.S has sent 12,000 soldiers to libya of course Cynthia McKinney already made this warning before on 13th of janunary. According to the reports they landed in the city of Brega they are saying it's aimed at generating stability and security in the region they are expected expected to take control of the country’s key oil fields and strategic ports. I found it on Libya360 seems an insurgency could happen.

Ooohhh.... If this is so, I say black flags and green flags unite, and let the people pick which one beats the red-black-and-green one that's got all these other flags trailing into the country behind it.

"generating stability and security in the region they are expected to take control of the country’s key oil fields and strategic ports"

This is what the western elite wants: stability in the areas associable with the oil and, later, water extraction. Also, they want the area secure around the NATO/US military base that will be permanent (and not subject to democratic review, at least not for a long time).

As for the whole country, infighting and division are fine as far as the western political elite is concerned. The weaker Libya is politically, the easier it is to get the country's natural resources at bargain-basement rates.

Relatively moral people, whether we favor or oppose Qaddafi, care about the economic, political, and social security of Libya. The elitist imperialists don't care about this at all. The western leaders have their individual political agendas (i.e., re-election) and they want their corporate backers satisfied—indeed, satiated—on resources of countries too weak to ward off a NATO attack.

By weakness, I include especially public-relations weakness. The PR of the Libyan government was far too weak in response to the elitist imperialists' regime-change propaganda.

Not just Fred Abrahams of HRW, [an "appalling" and "dangerous" throwback to the past.] but also Philip Luther of Amnesty International (MENA)has also got hot under the collar about the new anti-glofication law. http://www.thesundaily.my/news/368581 This new legislation is an eerie reminder of draconian legislation that was used to stamp out dissent during Kaddafi’s brutal four-decade rule"